Slipping into the roles of this trailblazing trio is Jonah Ray, whose serviceable performance as an average but not-so-average guy lacks the humble charm of his predecessors, and yet manages to come across as rather likable after an episode or two. Patton Oswalt repeatedly demonstrates his performance to be the most well-acted role in the whole show and a welcome inheritor of TV’s Frank role as the evil bumbling sidekick.

But it’s the robots that stand out most. Like Jonah, as characters they are pretty bland with undifferentiated behaviors, jokes, and even voices (it’s easy to confuse the three voices in the darkened theater). Their personalities are essentially interchangeable, making them feel underdeveloped and gimmicky, like caricatures of the originals. Even Gypsy (previously voiced by Jim Mallon), whose role as the somewhat mentally slower robot sibling, is not exempt. Altering her voice from “funny” to “young and sexy” strips her character of one her most defining feature.

The show launches with a rocky start. Its series opener aims below cheesy for the disappointing sub-adequate mark. Jokes range from fair to good, rarely great. By the second episode the team finds their riffing groove and the comedy becomes relatively smooth sailing from there on out.

That said, Jonah and the bots carry a heavy torch in following up the comical adeptness of MST3K’s original cast. While it may be hard to live up to the legendary Joel, Mike, Trace Beaulieu, Kevin Murphy, Bill Corbett, and Frank Conniff (let alone the powerhouse trio of Mike-Kevin-Bill, now of RiffTrax fame), even they did not start out as comedy all-stars. But with a little time and practice, maybe they will one day surpass the originals.

For many, the magic is in the freshness of seeing new MST3K episodes for the very first time. Or perhaps it is watching as one of the greatest cinematic experiences in living memory passes onto a new generation while also stoking the dormant coals of that beautiful old nostalgia.

Like this:

(Although we have a few comments to make regarding the film as a whole the majority of this review will be dedicated to the story’s adaptation from page to screen.)

Gavin Hood’sEnder’s Game takes a science fiction classic and visualizes it with dazzling realism and originality. The opening is rough and plagued by hokey dialogue but as the story progresses it gradually comes into its own, culminating in arguably the most breathtaking climactic end battle in all of science fiction to date, although the penultimate battle scenes leading up the climax feel truncated, making the third act feel rushed. Asa Butterfield (the principal lead) delivers a performance that becomes increasingly impressive as the film progresses.

As both writer and director, Hood impressively adapts difficult material to the silver screen, improving notable segments from the book such as the battle school sequence and simulated battles, and correlating Mazer Rackham’s final battle with Ender’s active progress during the course of the main plot.

However, some adaptation decisions were more poorly chosen, such as the near total absence of Ender’s older brother, Peter, who features so prominently in terms of theme and character development (for Ender) but is almost completely absent from the film, despite his being referenced often. As written, the character of Peter should have been omitted altogether to prevent unnecessary dilution of the plot. Also the psychologist character whose presence remains strong throughout the story is so poorly written and spouts redundant dialogue and concepts that are not illustrated in the film, especially earlier in the portions. So much more could have been done with the character to both expand and draw out Ender’s character but very little is ever utilized. The character ends up as a bloated element of fat filled with hot air.

Ender’s Game’s greatest weakness is its botched final reveal. By showing an additional point of view (an excellent adaptation choice) the filmmaker expands on the world of the story but presents the new information in a way that prematurely gives away the ending, thereby lessening the potential impact of one of the greatest reveals in science fiction history.

J.J. Abrams’s long anticipated sequel Star Trek: Into Darkness outdoes its predecessor in action, intensity and spectacle. Despite a running time of 2:12 (132 min) the film feels a little too short to play out the struggle between the protagonists and the main antagonist, played by Benedict Cumberbatch. The saturation of fan service and cross-references to other events in the Star Trek universe is an unending treat for fans of the franchise but at times detrimental, especially when it results in lines of hokey dialogue. A simple substitution of one of the film’s mindless action scenes for a short sequence to deepen character and theme development would have greatly benefited Into Darkness.

The first Star Trektook us with surprise by the acting intensity portrayed by its young cast. Into Darkness retains the same cast but fails to carry over the compelling emotional punch from its prequel. Part of this failure results from the from the disappointing script characterization of several cast members, namely Kirk, Spock, and Uhura. Benedict Cumberbatch proves the exception to this rule in his portrayal of the notorious Khan.

The biggest issue in Into Darkness is with the main antagonist, Khan. As one of the most intelligent and complex characters in the Star Trek Universe, more story and screen time oriented toward exploring the character’s intricacies is required in order for his personal journey to feel complete by the conclusion of his story arc. Instead of actually exploring the character, the story turns him into a 1-dimensional foe with no further development beyond the mid-point—a sad misappropriation of story potential. Much more could have been made of his shifting ally/enemy role as well but the film took the easy way out with his character, thereby losing both strength and depth as a result.

Intense in every sense of the word, Argento’s film is violent, visually vibrant and surreal with an alarmingly ear-grating soundtrack intentionally designed to set the audience’s nerves on edge. Be prepared for an experience that is both oddly immersive and abrasive to the senses.

The lighting, set design and shot composition are more the stars of this film than the doe-eyed lead, played by Jessica Harper, who merely drifts from one scene to the next as if led by an invisible hand.

The film’s vibrant visuals are just enough to counterbalance a feeble, sometimes nonsensical story and nonexistent character development. Some of its colorful dream-like qualities and childish dialogue make more sense when the viewer understands that portions of the film were inspired by the dreams of co-writer Daria Nicolodi, and that the script originally intended for the protagonist and her classmates to be no older than 12, but neither excuse a weak story.

Suspiria is a stunning film like no other, so be sure to put it in your canon of “must-sees” for cinematographers, art designers, filmmakers and horror buffs alongside other visually salient works like Roman Polanski’s Repulsion.

Like this:

Adrian Grunberg’s gritty tough-guy film, Get the Gringo, is a wry tongue-in-cheek action crime drama with an edgy but resourceful troublemaker for a protagonist. He is proactive and refreshingly clever, a guy who only looks out for himself in world where everyone is corrupt and everyone is out to get him.

Colorful in texture, tone and visuals, Gringo creates a palatable experience for the audience free from the dictatorial confines of the mainstream Hollywood studio system, as is evident in some of its more taboo elements and several touches of brutal violence. Characters grow out of the naturally developing, organic plotline and are inseparable from this well-told story.

Some viewers may find parts of the third act low on the believability scale but overall Gringo’s storytelling flaws are minimal.

Although the film may not aspire to deep philosophical pondering the film fulfills its goal as a solid piece of entertainment. If you are in the mood for a Friday night flick that is refreshing, stimulating and all-around entertaining, give Get the Gringoa try.

From the director of 13 Assassins comes Ichi the Killer, a gruesome but creative narrative that challenges the senses with its pushing of sex and violence to the extreme in an orgy of gore (a “gore-gy” if you will). (Ichi is banned in several countries for its “high impact violence and graphic depictions of cruelty”[Wikipedia].)

Although listed as an action/comedy/crime film imdb.com, Ichi may feel more like torture porn than anything else to regular movie-going audiences. Its surreal, creative departure from typical gore flicks is intriguing, enhanced by a unique soundtrack, thoughtful acting, and a deceptively simple plot which takes on new depth at the midpoint.

Ichi’s tortured main character is furnished with the uncanny ability to paint any room with a smorgasbord of blood and guts. A sexual dysfunctionary, this weak-minded assassin is the victim of manipulative bullies who push him to avenge a non-existent incident from his past. And while the film plays out as a visual dissertation on sadomasochism, the story is actually about bullying and bullies who, as adults, are fighting for survival among the fiercest criminals of the Shinjuku underworld. The protagonist manages to purge the screen of its many villains in a disappointingly anti-climactic conclusion.

Although it may be the most light-hearted torture porn ever made, Ichi the Killer is not for the faint of heart. Anyone expecting innocent laughs, seat-riveting action or a good old fashioned crime story should avert their eyes and ears and move on to something else. File Ichi in the “most gruesome films of world cinema” category, right next to Salo.

Act of Valor is a ballad of the unsung heroic deeds of Navy SEALs in clandestine operations.

Although neatly structured the film feels less like a coherent story than a series of military reenactments with a few specks of story spliced in between action sequences. Valoris generously laden with fan service for military aficionados, but at times the ultra realistic use of military jargon crosses the line from necessity to extraneous masturbation. Action sequences deliver impressive intensity and speed while skillful POV camerawork immerses the audience inside each mission, lending a sort of video game feel to the advancement of the plot.

The acting is as wooden as it gets and not just in terms of line delivery—no surprise, considering the principal characters are played by real Navy SEALs and not professional actors. Unfortunately this means that emotional tangibility with the main characters is difficult to establish, even with the repeated use of artificial filmic constructs employed to build personal empathy.

Actor Jason Cottle’s uncanny intensity makes his performance stand out among the cast.

If Act of Valorteaches us anything, it’s that “actual” does not equal “dramatic.” For a stellar example of how dramatizing reality improves its filmic qualities, see Seal Team Six: The Raid on Osama bin Laden. In spite of its painful dialogue and feeble plot, Act of Valor is a realistic, tense experience that military and action enthusiasts will love.